|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 15, No. 3,
247-258 (2001)
DOI: 10.1191/026921501673658108
© 2001 SAGE Publications
Developing a disease-specific quality of life measure for people with multiple sclerosis
H L Ford
Department of Neurology, St James's University Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
E Gerry
Nuffield Institute for Health, St James's University Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
A Tennant
D Whalley
R Haigh
Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, St James's University Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
M H Johnson
Department of Neurology, St James's University Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
Objectives: To develop a patient-completed disease-specific measure of quality of life in multiple sclerosis and to validate the measure in a community-based population of people with multiple sclerosis.
Methods: The items in the scale were selected in focus group sessions of people with multiple sclerosis. The initial scale included 25 items and was tested in subgroups of 150 people from a population register of people with multiple sclerosis in Leeds. Following further developmental phases, a restructured 16-item scale was tested on a random sample of 200 people with multiple sclerosis from the population register, stratified according to disease course. This led to a final eight-item unidimensional scale, the Leeds Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life (LMSQoL) scale.
Results: After initial development a 16-item scale was found to be both reliable and valid. Cronbach' s alpha for the 16-item scale was 0.86. The test–retest correlation was 0.74, using a two-week retest interval. However, convergent validity with the General Well Being Index was 0.67 and with the SF-36 Physical Function Scale was 0.68. This suggested that the scale straddled these two concepts and was confirmed by fit of the data to the Rasch measurement model. This revealed the potential for a reduced eight-item version of the scale. The eight-item scale had a closer association to well-being (0.83) than to physical function (0.39), had good internal consistency (0.79) and test–retest reliability (0.85). There were virtually no floor or ceiling effects for the scale.
Conclusions: The study presents a disease-specific measure of quality of life in multiple sclerosis, the Leeds Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life (LMSQoL) scale. The instrument is brief, easy to use and practical to administer in clinic or as a postal questionnaire. It measures a construct related to well-being, and provides an important adjunct to the measurement of outcome in multiple sclerosis.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
M. Simeoni, P. Auquier, O. Fernandez, P. Flachenecker, S. Stecchi, C. Constantinescu, E. Idiman, A. Boyko, A. Beiske, T. Vollmer, et al.
Validation of the Multiple Sclerosis International Quality of Life questionnaire
Multiple Sclerosis,
March 1, 2008;
14(2):
219 - 230.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O Lily, E McFadden, E Hensor, M Johnson, and H Ford
Disease-specific quality of life in multiple sclerosis: the effect of disease modifying treatment
Multiple Sclerosis,
November 1, 2006;
12(6):
808 - 813.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Nicholl, J C Hobart, A F. Cramp, and A S Lowe-Strong
Measuring quality of life in multiple sclerosis: not as simple as it sounds
Multiple Sclerosis,
December 1, 2005;
11(6):
708 - 712.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. K. Sutherland and P. A Cowan
Using special interest sessions to design and implement a fatigue management group for people with multiple sclerosis
Psychiatr. Bull.,
October 1, 2005;
29(10):
388 - 391.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Heffernan and C. Jenkinson
Review Paper: Measuring outcomes for neurological disorders: a review of disease-specific health status instruments for three degenerative neurological conditions
Chronic Illness,
June 1, 2005;
1(2):
131 - 142.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J D Fisk, M G Brown, I S Sketris, L M Metz, T J Murray, and K J Stadnyk
A comparison of health utility measures for the evaluation of multiple sclerosis treatments
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry,
January 1, 2005;
76(1):
58 - 63.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D A Gruenewald, I J Higginson, B Vivat, P Edmonds, and R E Burman
Quality of life measures for the palliative care of people severely affected by multiple sclerosis: a systematic review
Multiple Sclerosis,
December 1, 2004;
10(6):
690 - 725.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J G Beaumont
The MS symptom and impact diary (MSSID): psychometric evaluation of a new instrument to measure the day to day impact of multiple sclerosis
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry,
April 1, 2004;
75(4):
526 - 527.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Hobart, N Kalkers, F Barkhof, B Uitdehaag, C Polman, and A Thompson
Outcome measures for multiple sclerosis clinical trials: relative measurement precision of the Expanded Disability Status Scale and Multiple Sclerosis Functional C omposite
Multiple Sclerosis,
February 1, 2004;
10(1):
41 - 46.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Al-Smadi, K Warke, I Wilson, A F L Cramp, G Noble, D M Walsh, and A S Lowe-Strong
A pilot investigation of the hypoalgesic effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation upon low back pain in people with multiple sclerosis
Clinical Rehabilitation,
July 1, 2003;
17(7):
742 - 749.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M W Nortvedt and T Riise
The use of quality of life measures in multiple sclerosis research
Multiple Sclerosis,
February 1, 2003;
9(1):
63 - 72.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J Thompson
Developing clinical outcome measures in multiple sclerosis: an evolving process
Multiple Sclerosis,
October 1, 2002;
8(5):
357 - 358.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
